Jump to content

Buy the buddies funds paid early


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, rea said:

You actually as a member own a single share in SMISA IIRC

I'm not sure Richard. I've never seen a share document or any notification that I own a share. 

The SMISA website is pretty clear though. One member one vote. Member benefits. All members have an equal say in the running of our club. 

 

Edited to add, actually the only bit on the website that I can see that suggests anyone gets a share is in the member benefit section where if you pay more than £2500 you get 10 shares in St Mirren. 

Capture.PNG

Edited by Stuart Dickson
Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

Everyone who posts is craving attention. If they weren't they wouldn't post. :rolleyes: 

In my case, I've offered help, offered advice, contacted SMiSA and been told to wait. I'm still waiting but I won't wait much longer. If I was a member of any other club and was unhappy with the way it was being run I'd simply cancel my membership and go elsewhere. If SMiSA aren't going to fulfill their promise to put St Mirren at the heart of the community then they don't deserve my membership fees. Someone who will put their football club at the heart of their community will be far more deserving. It's as simple as that. 

I'm also a bit perplexed about where the monthly meeting agenda's are being published or where the minutes of each meeting are being kept. Surely those should be available to members? Shouldn't they? 

Yes everyone craves attention but that is not what he said.

You missed the qualifier where he said they crave attention THAT THEY DONT DESERVE.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Yes everyone craves attention but that is not what he said.

You missed the qualifier where he said they crave attention THAT THEY DONT DESERVE.

Oh I get you. Like people who like to post quoting me, responding to me, to tell me that everyone is ignoring me and who continue to prove everyone is ignoring me by answering to many of my posts over the following week. :rolleyes: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

The website also makes reference to the constitution so I presume one exists. It refers to it when talking about Under 16's not being allowed to vote and also in the news section when it says that the constitution does not allow SMiSA to sell shares. 

Under the section Who are SMISA there id a link to the constitution, you are wrong as usual

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the section Who are SMISA there id a link to the constitution, you are wrong as usual

You know what, you're right. Although it's anything but easy to find. Have I missed the minutes of the meetings in the same way? 108 in the constitution says minutes must be taken and kept. Surely members should be able to access them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2016 at 4:37 PM, Stuart Dickson said:

I don't know why you would dread it. It's pretty simple. When SMiSA first started I was one of the first people to sign up. I can't remember what number I was but it was in single digits. The promise back then, and the mantra for all Independent Supporter Associations was that their purpose was to buy shares in the football club, to get a director onto the board of directors at the club and to give the supporters a voice in that boardroom. It started well, but after a period of time SMiSA found purchasing shares to be difficult and whilst sitting on a pot of money they were approached by the last board of directors to help out the club by buying t-shirts (those red cotton ones with SMISA written on it) and towels. The membership had a vote and bizarrely the majority decided it was a good idea and the cash got wasted. It struck me that the movement had drifted from their original goal and members were being taken for mugs and since I have a choice I chose to cancel my membership. 

I rejoined again in the build up to this Buy The Buds programme. I'm a big fan of fan ownership and I've contributed and still contribute to a number of similar programmes elsewhere. I went for the £24 per month fee despite not being attracted by any of the "privileges" and I pledged that I would auction any that I got for charity, as I tried to do with the Millennium night. Now as I understood the offer it was that SMiSA would be partnering with Gordon Scott to purchase the club, Gordon Scott putting up the majority of funding and holding the chairman post as a result and over a number of years SMiSA would purchase that shareholding from Gordon Scott. At the same time there was to be a members pot which would be there to be spent as directed by the majority of members. There is a big promise on the front page of the SMiSA website which attracts me. "St Mirren fans have a one off chance to make sure the club remains at the heart of the Paisley community and in the hands of the people who care the most for it." So I'd expect SMiSA to ensure as part of the membership offer that projects are undertaken that involve and benefit the whole community, not just the football club. 

The thought that I am helping to put the club into fan ownership makes me happy. The thought that some of the money will go to re-establishing good links with the community and putting the club back at the heart of the town really appeals to me. However if I believe that SMISA and the membership have lost sight of that then as before I should stop chucking money at it and contribute funds elsewhere. 

I'm sure if SMiSA continues to remain focused on it's aims most of the membership will stick. Indeed if attention is put towards working with the community and getting the brand back out there with some really positive stories, I'm sure membership might even grow. Similarly I'm sure if the St Mirren board see that membership fund as a place to turn to get repairs done to the under soil heating, or to renew the 3g pitch at Ralston without it being in the form of a loan or in return for shares, I'm certain that others - like me - will see that as a loss of focus on the goals of the organisation. 

Offering to write cheques for either SMiSA or the club indefinitely and without condition simply doesn't appeal to me. 

I do get what your saying about funds going to community schemes and the likes.  That's all great and needed  and yes you're probably right it would eventually help memberships grow and the club/ town as a whole.  What I would say is if St Mirren need money to repair one off costs like broken undersoil heating or the pitch up at Ralston and ask for funds from this membership pot to avoid eating into our general running costs I think that's fair enough.  This is a democracy if SMISA put it to a vote between one thing the club have asked for and one thing community based it'll be up to the paying members to vote on it.  What I certainly won't do is throw my toys out the pram and cancel my £25 a month membership because my fellow buddies have voted a different way from me. The communication from SMISA and Scott throughout all of this has been very good I feel but I'm also a realist and know there will be bumps along the way.  If St Mirren were to ask for money for undersoil heating and the members agreed to it then so be it.  

Back to my original point about continuing payments after the loan is paid. £15,900 (1325 X £12) would pay for a lot of community projects, and provide funds for St Mirren to grow, cover short term costs and could go towards a lot of things that'll make us better on the park.  The club would be fully fanned own as well and bar some fans having a difference of opinion on what their money should be spent on I don't see a downside.  I'd reiterate as well, it's long term gains and I for one will not be cancelling my membership following what may be the result of a democratic vote following a request from our club. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Richard. I've never seen a share document or any notification that I own a share. 
The SMISA website is pretty clear though. One member one vote. Member benefits. All members have an equal say in the running of our club. 
 
Edited to add, actually the only bit on the website that I can see that suggests anyone gets a share is in the member benefit section where if you pay more than £2500 you get 10 shares in St Mirren. 
Capture.PNG

You own a Share in SMISA which owns the shares in thr Club
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what, you're right. Although it's anything but easy to find. Have I missed the minutes of the meetings in the same way? 108 in the constitution says minutes must be taken and kept. Surely members should be able to access them

That is minutes of SMISA meetings not Club ones.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The website also makes reference to the constitution so I presume one exists. It refers to it when talking about Under 16's not being allowed to vote and also in the news section when it says that the constitution does not allow SMiSA to sell shares. 

It is important to read the SMISA constitution particularly as they have now incorporated an "asset lock" into it. Which in my opinion limits the scope of what members can vote on to do with the £2 pm floating fund. In order to move asset locked cash out of an organisation you need to match one of 4 categories of reason for moving the cash. This is certainly the case with CICs and the asset lock reg used here is taken from that comp structure although possibly slighlty tweaked. Will be interesting to see what members and regulations think if a Club e.g a limited company in theory designed to make a profit and with shareholders not involved in SMISA asks for or recieves money not directly for an obvious community type project like the wheelchair platform that is currently controlled by a body with an "asset lock" rule

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Yeah it's SMISA minutes I was referring to. Other ISAs have the minutes of their meetings available to their members but SMISA don't unless it's hidden away, like the constitution.

Your a member you can propose it as something you want to happen and there agm can vote on it....i assume
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Yeah it's SMISA minutes I was referring to. Other ISAs have the minutes of their meetings available to their members but SMISA don't unless it's hidden away, like the constitution.

Most will normally have a meeting summary posted rather than the verbatum minutes as these will/may contain info not for public distribution at the time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/12/2016 at 5:11 AM, Stuart Dickson said:

Oh I get you. Like people who like to post quoting me, responding to me, to tell me that everyone is ignoring me and who continue to prove everyone is ignoring me by answering to many of my posts over the following week. :rolleyes: 

 

True but it isnt me you are trying to impress with your big ideas is it?

The people who matter to you are unanimously ignoring you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but it isnt me you are trying to impress with your big ideas is it?
The people who matter to you are unanimously ignoring you.


I think that might be the difference between both of us. I'm genuinely not trying to impress anyone, and certainly not anyone at SMISA. I just wish clubs would be more community focused and I know this can be not only cash neutral but profitable. I'd say the idea of a Community Christmas Dinner is pretty simple, basic and yet an effective way to show the slight changes in mindset required. Yet the organisation which claims it wants to put the club at the "heart of the community" seems to be actively preparing to tell us all that you do this by paying to fix the undersoil heating at Greenhill Road.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it odd and a tad unreasonable that folk are expecting quite so much from the new custodians of the club, quite so soon.

I understand all the chat about community engagement and the like,  but these guys are in there to run a football club, first and foremost. They should be given time to get that right, and further opportunity to develop other areas as have been discussed.

It seems that some folk were barely willing to let the new regime in the door before the knives were out. If, in two years time, there is little evidence of progress in the areas that have been mentioned, that will (for me at any rate) be the time to ask serious questions.

Edited by Drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Drew said:

I find it odd and a tad unreasonable that folk are expecting quite so much from the new custodians of the club, quite so soon.

I understand all the chat about community engagement and the like,  but these guys are in there to run a football club, first and foremost. They should be given time to get that right, and further opportunity to develop other areas as have been discussed.

It seems that some folk were barely willing to let the new regime in the door before the knives were out. If, in two years time, there is little evidence of progress in the areas that have been mentioned, that will (for me at any rate) be the time to ask serious questions.

Is it impossible to imagine that they could be addressing both these areas?

I doubt it's a 24 hour/7 days a week job as issues wouldn't, IMO, arise often enough to keep these "guys" occupied so it shouldn't be too hard to show some willingness to involve the community in some new innovative form?

I happen to agree that the first priority is the football club but a large part of that is down to the manager getting the team sorted.

I also agree it's early days but it seems there is next to nothing happening and that is possibly why people, rightly or wrongly, are a "tad" upset.

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Drew said:

I find it odd and a tad unreasonable that folk are expecting quite so much from the new custodians of the club, quite so soon.

I understand all the chat about community engagement and the like,  but these guys are in there to run a football club, first and foremost. They should be given time to get that right, and further opportunity to develop other areas as have been discussed.

It seems that some folk were barely willing to let the new regime in the door before the knives were out. If, in two years time, there is little evidence of progress in the areas that have been mentioned, that will (for me at any rate) be the time to ask serious questions.

Agreed. It is great that Hibs and this cafe in Paisley are doing this but why on earth should anyone else feel pressured into doing the same thing?

I am also concerned about the motive here. Is it to help these people out or to be seen to be helping out so that the club gets more people watching games? Some would argue it doesnt matter but to me it does matter. It matters when charitable deeds are being used as a weapon against those who are not interested. It matters even more when the motive of the person doing that charitable act is doing it for publicity and then others are being guilted for not doing anything themselves.

As I say, it is great Hibs are doing this but they have jumped straight on the phone to the local papers and are milking the publicity. This tells me why they are engaging in this activity. Publicity. I have no problem with that but they should at least be honest about it. I have no idea about the cafe though. She might have genuine reason for wanting to help these people but why is she all over the papers? Millions of people do charitable things without feeling the need to seek public credit for doing so.

This is the problem with Dickos comment from my perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Is it impossible to imagine that they could be addressing both these areas?

I doubt it's a 24 hour/7 days a week job as issues wouldn't, IMO, arise often enough to keep these "guys" occupied so it shouldn't be too hard to show some willingness to involve the community in some new innovative form?

I happen to agree that the first priority is the football club but a large part of that is down to the manager getting the team sorted.

I also agree it's early days but it seems there is next to nothing happening and that is possibly why people, rightly or wrongly, are a "tad" upset.

Maybe they simply arent interested in doing things like this?

Why should they feel obligated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Most will normally have a meeting summary posted rather than the verbatum minutes as these will/may contain info not for public distribution at the time


That hasn't been my experience of ISAs I have been and am members of. Usually they are accessible through a log in on their website. One sends out minutes by email. If the committee isn't producing accurate minutes of their meetings for the members to read then its going to be very difficult for members to make informed choices when it gets to the SMiSA Arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Maybe they simply arent interested in doing things like this?

Why should they feel obligated?

As you, obviously, know nothing about the aims of SMISA it's best you run along. :lol:

Volunteer call to action

Something both the SMISA committee and Gordon Scott are keen to investigate is how to harness the membership’s collective power to volunteer on projects which will help the club and community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Most will normally have a meeting summary posted rather than the verbatum minutes as these will/may contain info not for public distribution at the time


Don't agree with that Richard.
Minutes of a public body should be transparant and available in full.

Anything sensitive should be managed by a sub group and summarised at the main meeting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

As you, obviously, know nothing about the aims of SMISA it's best you run along. :lol:

Volunteer call to action

Something both the SMISA committee and Gordon Scott are keen to investigate is how to harness the membership’s collective power to volunteer on projects which will help the club and community.

That doesnt answer my question. The above is a mission statement.

This entire thread is about a specific thing.

You understand those are two different things right?

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Don't agree with that Richard.
Minutes of a public body should be transparant and available in full.

Anything sensitive should be managed by a sub group and summarised at the main meeting.

Not a Public body.

The only minutes that are in theory public are any taken on poll votes at AGMs.

Other minutes are of board meetings but are mearly for the board to read and approve at next meeting

The members can of course change the rules or the board decide to release more than is statutory in the rules1481393921766.thumb.jpg.1d7cedebc957882c
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...